Which little-used stations might be candidates for closure in the new age of cost-cutting?

[JohnRegular]

I cannot imagine that demand for rail travel to Exeter is strong, or else it wouldn't need to be so heavily subsidised.

You say this, but according to several other posters, trains on the Barnstaple line are regularly very busy.

My own experience with the line is minimal so I can't comment myself, but I don't think it's useful to (presumably) read other posters saying that they've often experinced busy trains there, and say 'well I can't imagine there's really any demand'.

That it requires heavy subsidy is not in and of itself evidence that services are poorly used; the popular wisdom on this forum that XC services operate at a loss (if true) is certainly not evidence that voyagers are carting around fresh air all day!

 

[bramling]

I've driven into Exeter from every direction, and while it is busy in the rush hour, I've never encountered traffic anywhere near as bad as I was used to in Surrey. Guildford was a whole 'nother level of traffic hell. I've also driven the A377 end to end in considerably less time than Google Maps suggests is possible without speeding - if you drive to the limit, it's a quick enough road, certainly faster than the train, which, in the time when I stayed in a property overlooking the line in the autumn of 2019, mostly looked to be running empty. Barnstaple is mostly a town of retired geriatrics and, being so far removed from anywhere else, is quite well-provided-for in terms of its own needs and facilities. I cannot imagine that demand for rail travel to Exeter is strong, or else it wouldn't need to be so heavily subsidised.



I haven’t, admittedly, but again, I know the Launceston to Saltash and Tavistock to Plymouth roads very well, and at no time have I ever encountered conditions on them that I could call nightmarish. Google Maps says 38 minutes by car from Gunnislake to Plymouth (in good conditions it’s doable in half an hour) vs 45 minutes by train.

I’d say Exeter’s traffic is pretty bad by provincial standards. The Barnstaple line seems to do fairly well for what it is, I suspect a reasonable proportion of journeys will be feeding onto other services at Exeter, in addition to local journeys. Of course, Tiverton Parkway is a significant competition in this respect.

You say this, but according to several other posters, trains on the Barnstaple line are regularly very busy.

My own experience with the line is minimal so I can't comment myself, but I don't think it's useful to (presumably) read other posters saying that they've often experinced busy trains there, and say 'well I can't imagine there's really any demand'.

That it requires heavy subsidy is not in and of itself evidence that services are poorly used; the popular wisdom on this forum that XC services operate at a loss (if true) is certainly not evidence that voyagers are carting around fresh air all day!

I wouldn’t say Barnstaple trains are always very busy, but equally it isn’t some rural backwater that carries all fresh air. All the local services revolving around Exeter are pretty well used, which shouldn’t really be a surprise given the congested roads and numerous centres of population.

 

[stuu]

I've driven into Exeter from every direction, and while it is busy in the rush hour, I've never encountered traffic anywhere near as bad as I was used to in Surrey. Guildford was a whole 'nother level of traffic hell. I've also driven the A377 end to end in considerably less time than Google Maps suggests is possible without speeding - if you drive to the limit, it's a quick enough road, certainly faster than the train, which, in the time when I stayed in a property overlooking the line in the autumn of 2019, mostly looked to be running empty. Barnstaple is mostly a town of retired geriatrics and, being so far removed from anywhere else, is quite well-provided-for in terms of its own needs and facilities. I cannot imagine that demand for rail travel to Exeter is strong, or else it wouldn't need to be so heavily subsidised.

Google maps gets the journey times live from all the journeys being undertaken, it changes depending on the time of day. Right now it is 1hr 13m via both the A377 and the A361, which is pretty much identical to the train journey time

Crudely dividing the number of passengers by the number of trains, there are an average of 42 passengers on every single departure from Barnstaple, which seems reasonably healthy. I think it would be safe to assume 99% of them are going to Exeter or further

 

[D6130]

I can't help thinking that it would be a shame to lose a station with a name such as King's Nymphton

Sorry to be a party pooper....but it's actually called King's Nympton - without an 'h'!

 

[yorksrob]

Sorry to be a party pooper....but it's actually called King's Nympton - without an 'h'!

Oh, that's not nearly as evocative

 

[RPI]

I've driven into Exeter from every direction, and while it is busy in the rush hour, I've never encountered traffic anywhere near as bad as I was used to in Surrey. Guildford was a whole 'nother level of traffic hell. I've also driven the A377 end to end in considerably less time than Google Maps suggests is possible without speeding - if you drive to the limit, it's a quick enough road, certainly faster than the train, which, in the time when I stayed in a property overlooking the line in the autumn of 2019, mostly looked to be running empty. Barnstaple is mostly a town of retired geriatrics and, being so far removed from anywhere else, is quite well-provided-for in terms of its own needs and facilities. I cannot imagine that demand for rail travel to Exeter is strong, or else it wouldn't need to be so heavily subsidised.

How much is it subsidised by? I'd be grateful for a source for this information.

I work these trains on a daily basis and there is very strong demand for travel to Exeter, when you factor in how bad traffic is in and around Exeter, the cost of parking, the cost of fuel, the train is a very attractive option. To say Barnstaple is full of geriatrics is tripe, the station also acts as a railhead for most of North Devon. You clearly have no knowledge of the actual usage of the line!

 

[matacaster]

To be honest I was surprised Ravensthorpe is set to survive the upgrade. There's not much immediately surrounding the station besides light industry. The upgrade does however separate the fast and slow services as well as allowing the currently non-existent Wakefield service to call, so perhaps this fancy rebuilt station could encourage development in the area.

There was at one point a suggestion to close both Ravensthorpe and Mirfield, replacing them with a new Mirfield station somewhere between the two (so not serving either place particularly well). Thankfully this crackpot idea seems to have died.

Ravensthorpe station will be better if Wakefield trains can call (assuming they return). I am very surprised to see developer's rushing to build new housing anywhere near Ravensthorpe., it has all the charm of Rotherham minus the attractive steelworks. It also might have contaminated land where the old power station was?

4000 houses are set to be built a stones throw from Ravensthorpe station.

Well the good news is there is already ample provision of takeaways in Ravensthorpe to serve this number of new houses. However, most takeaway owners fear the arrival of a public health inspector.

 

[nw1]

I've never used the Barnstaple line, but by all accounts it seems to be reasonably well used, and is the only rail link to that part of Devon.

If people on here are seriously suggesting it as a candidate for closure that's worrying. We do have severe economic problems, for various reasons, but let's not see slash and burn as the only solution.

 

[21C195 Brentor]

42 passengers could easily be moved by bus just as quickly for vastly less money. If the average loading was over a hundred I'd be slightly more impressed.

Be prepared that the post-Covid reality of work-from-home, public spending cuts and people struggling to afford any form of transport is going to force not only station closures but also complete Beeching-style line closures. I would be most surprised if the Barnstaple branch survives long-term. It's not on the tourism map to anything like the extent of Penzance, St Ives or Newquay, and the local economy just isn't sufficient to support it. Right now it and Okehampton are propping each other up, and OKE has access to northern Dartmoor going for it, but once the honeymoon period novelty has worn off, I'd be astounded if it didn't see services reduced - as mentioned, the station is very inconveniently located for most local residents and this combined with the slowness of the service means nobody who has a choice of modes is opting for the train as their first resort. Both trackbeds would likely end up carrying more people as cycle paths than they ever will as working railways, sad to say.

As for the campaigns to reopen the Ilfracombe and Bude lines... fanciful barely begins to describe how profoundly unviable these non-starters are. Completely and utterly impossible. The nascent Torrington heritage railway is a waste of time and money too, it will never get anywhere.

The L&B appears largely moribund these days too, for all the grand plans they've published they're no closer to Parracombe now than they were a decade ago...

 

[JamesRowden]

42 passengers could easily be moved by bus just as quickly for vastly less money. If the average loading was over a hundred I'd be slightly more impressed.

Be prepared that the post-Covid reality of work-from-home, public spending cuts and people struggling to afford any form of transport is going to force not only station closures but also complete Beeching-style line closures. I would be most surprised if the Barnstaple branch survives long-term. It's not on the tourism map to anything like the extent of Penzance, St Ives or Newquay, and the local economy just isn't sufficient to support it. Right now it and Okehampton are propping each other up, and OKE has access to northern Dartmoor going for it, but once the honeymoon period novelty has worn off, I'd be astounded if it didn't see services reduced - as mentioned, the station is very inconveniently located for most local residents and this combined with the slowness of the service means nobody who has a choice of modes is opting for the train as their first resort. Both trackbeds would likely end up carrying more people as cycle paths than they ever will as working railways, sad to say.

As for the campaigns to reopen the Ilfracombe and Bude lines... fanciful barely begins to describe how profoundly unviable these non-starters are. Completely and utterly impossible. The nascent Torrington heritage railway is a waste of time and money too, it will never get anywhere.

The L&B appears largely moribund these days too, for all the grand plans they've published they're no closer to Parracombe now than they were a decade ago...

I make it 12 buses required rather than 3 trains in order to provide the required peak capacity with journey times increasing from 67 minutes (same time as a non-stop taxi from experience) to 100 minutes (a guesstimate). This is based on requiring an every 20 minute peak service to carry the existing loadings.

The economics might be improved by having an every 30 minute service between Barnstaple and Exeter plus an hourly service between Barnstaple and Tiverton Parkway (for journeys via Taunton). Or perhaps the Barnstaple to Exeter bus service should run as an express service via Tiverton Parkway (and let the existing 5B or equivalent bus service be increased in frequency to hourly or half hourly to serve the demand from intermediate locations on the existing rail route).

Either option significantly extends Barnstaple to Exeter public transport journey times (except for the option of an express bus service running in addition to local bus services) and requires a large number of additional buses and bus drivers. Although, maybe an every 20 minute express bus service from Barnstaple via Tiverton Parkway might attract many long distance passengers out of their cars for that section of their journey.

 

[The Planner]

Noted a comment about digital signalling, you won't be seeing ETCS up there anytime soon.

 

[Grecian 1998]

Anyone suggesting the Gunnislake branch should go clearly hasn't looked at the geography of the Bere peninsula and the difficulties of getting to Plymouth by road. No government since the 1960s that I know of has suggested building a road bridge over the Tavy, so there clearly isn't any appetite for changing the status quo. I have heard the peak services are well used (although never been on them myself) and as @RPI works trains in the area, I'd assume they know what they're talking about.

If we get to a point where there is serious talk of closing the Barnstaple line, we'll have moved beyond the point of closing lightly used rural lines and got to the point of closing non-profitable lines irrespective of how well used they are. The rail network would start to look like one of the C options of the Serpell report.

The current bus options from Exeter to Barnstaple are both indirect, either via South Molton or Bideford. The first takes an hour longer each way than the train, the second almost 1.5 hours longer. Whilst there's nothing to stop anyone running a fast bus service from Exeter to Barnstaple, the fact there isn't one suggests there isn't a belief it could compete with the train on journey times.

 

[stuu]

42 passengers could easily be moved by bus just as quickly for vastly less money. If the average loading was over a hundred I'd be slightly more impressed.

By the same crude calculation, the average train leaves St Ives with 39 people on board, and that is considered very successful.

An average of 42 passengers is pretty high, that includes all the trains in the evening and against the peak direction. Some of them are obviously a lot busier.

 

[RPI]

42 passengers could easily be moved by bus just as quickly for vastly less money. If the average loading was over a hundred I'd be slightly more impressed.

Be prepared that the post-Covid reality of work-from-home, public spending cuts and people struggling to afford any form of transport is going to force not only station closures but also complete Beeching-style line closures. I would be most surprised if the Barnstaple branch survives long-term. It's not on the tourism map to anything like the extent of Penzance, St Ives or Newquay, and the local economy just isn't sufficient to support it. Right now it and Okehampton are propping each other up, and OKE has access to northern Dartmoor going for it, but once the honeymoon period novelty has worn off, I'd be astounded if it didn't see services reduced - as mentioned, the station is very inconveniently located for most local residents and this combined with the slowness of the service means nobody who has a choice of modes is opting for the train as their first resort. Both trackbeds would likely end up carrying more people as cycle paths than they ever will as working railways, sad to say.

As for the campaigns to reopen the Ilfracombe and Bude lines... fanciful barely begins to describe how profoundly unviable these non-starters are. Completely and utterly impossible. The nascent Torrington heritage railway is a waste of time and money too, it will never get anywhere.

The L&B appears largely moribund these days too, for all the grand plans they've published they're no closer to Parracombe now than they were a decade ago...

The 42 passengers was an average.... the 0732 from Barnstaple usually carries just over 200 from Barnstaple (based on a 3 car 158 being full leaving) and the last train probably carries no one back, thats how averages work.

The work for home theory doesn't really work down here, most of the commuters in the Devon area are employed in retail/hospitality which is why commuter traffic has returned to normal here.

Again, from your ramblings you're unable to provide any sources for your uninformed speculation, I honestly would invite you to at least go and travel on these lines before making such statements, the thought that the Barnstaple line is some lightly used rural line is utter tosh!

 

[21C195 Brentor]

@Grecian 1998 as I've already noted, the road connections from Gunnislake to Plymouth are pretty decent, just a B road to Callington then A388 the rest of the way to Saltash, journey times are competitive with/faster than the railway.

The network is only going to shrink from here, lightly used rural lines as well as short suburban branches will close as economic realities bite. I don’t think anyone has truly grasped quite what deep shyte we are in financially, and we will not recover to where we were before, even if the money returned, technology has changed the game forever.

@RPI I am aware of the hospitality trade, I have a family member living with me who works in two pub kitchens on the west side of Dartmoor. Having the GWR Lifton to Lydford line would be useful for one of them, but from here, there was never a useful way of getting onto the Moor itself, the Princetown branch linked solely with Plymouth so not useful this side of the A30.

Nonetheless, WFH is having an impact everywhere, loadings are down all over the shop, anybody who can work remotely is either choosing or being forced to do so. There will never be a return to 20-teens peak traffic levels.

 

[lachlan]

@Grecian 1998 as I've already noted, the road connections from Gunnislake to Plymouth are pretty decent, just a B road to Callington then A388 the rest of the way to Saltash, journey times are competitive with/faster than the railway.

The network is only going to shrink from here, lightly used rural lines as well as short suburban branches will close as economic realities bite. I don’t think anyone has truly grasped quite what deep shyte we are in financially, and we will not recover to where we were before, even if the money returned, technology has changed the game forever.

@RPI I am aware of the hospitality trade, I have a family member living with me who works in two pub kitchens on the west side of Dartmoor. Having the GWR Lifton to Lydford line would be useful for one of them, but from here, there was never a useful way of getting onto the Moor itself, the Princetown branch linked solely with Plymouth so not useful this side of the A30.

Nonetheless, WFH is having an impact everywhere, loadings are down all over the shop, anybody who can work remotely is either choosing or being forced to do so. There will never be a return to 20-teens peak traffic levels.

The network isn't going to shrink if we are to take reducing car use seriously. Many disabled people can't drive, they still need to get about regardless of if people are working from home. Never mind that car use has exceeded pre-pandemic levels many times recently and so clearly more people are travelling despite what you say about working from home!

 

[nw1]

I used to live in the Surrey stockbroker belt and can think of a few lightly-used stations not many would miss. Boxhill & Westhumble is one, not even walkers use it much, it was mostly a request stop (even trains which were supposed to stop would often just sweep through), some services were not allotted a stop there, and generally it was very little used.

But given trains go to Dorking anyway, it costs very little keeping it open. I thought we were supposed to be advocating green transport?

Beaulieu Road is rather similar in many ways to Boxhill, doubtless that would be counted as a candidate for closure by some. That's local to me, if anyone tried that on believe you me I would take an active part in protests.

Please let's not go down the route of such dangerously hardline economic conservatism which could produce lasting damage. There's got to be something better than permanent closure. Temporary cuts during economic hard times is one thing (and much more acceptable); once you close a line and lift the track, it's then a difficult and expensive job to get it open again.

In my view the only closures worth doing right now are stations and services which are parliamentary and serve little useful purpose. Denton, Reddish, that sort of thing.

The stations between Dorking and Horsham could go too. On the New Guildford Lines, Bookham is miles from the village it is supposed to serve and has little car parking, so consequently saw little use. Effingham Junction is a bleak, windswept place but it has a huge car park and the convenience of services to/from both the Leatherhead and Claygate lines, and I know a lot of Bookhamites would go there in preference to Bookham. Horsley is well used thanks to a good location, even if car parking is tight (again, Effingham offers a decent alternative if you want easier parking). Clandon never seemed to see much use even at peak times, for those going into Guildford it's quicker to just drive and for those commuting up to London from Guildford, they wouldn't even be on that line to start with! London Road Guildford desperately needed investment in passenger facilities, it was well used at peak times by students but there were no indoor waiting rooms, the buildings were mostly boarded up, and it could be a viciously inhospitable place to wait for a train on a cold winter evening.

Down here in Devon, I would certainly close all the stations between Crediton and Barnstaple, and Okehampton is the only station on that line worth keeping open. If I was in a less charitable mood, I'd point out that both LSWR routes have been massive money pits over the last few years and that the investment is unlikely ever to be recouped. Okehampton Station is inconveniently sited miles from the town, and the circuitous route the line takes via Crediton makes it a very slow way of getting to Exeter - by the time you've driven from the town centre or the new housing developments going up on the north side, you can save half an hour by just staying in your car and driving to Exeter. It would have been better left and developed as a preserved railway. The OkeRail campaign seemed to be primarily motivated by nostalgia anyway, as evidenced by their campaign vehicle (often seen parked around town festooned with signage) being a Riley RM...

As for the Alton line in Hampshire, I've heard that, in the 1980s, BR offered it to the MHR, giving them the opportunity to take over the route as far as Farnham.

Is that really the case? Surely Alton would have generated significant traffic in the 80s, particularly at commuter times. Thankfully common sense prevailed in the 80s and they did not shut a line which was deemed worthy of electrification as long ago as 1937 so was surely no basket-case.

The preservationists turned it down as their finances were not then in great shape (they'd already taken out a big bank loan to finance the Alton extension). Now, the MHR is debt-free, AFAIK, and Farnham would make an attractive destination for them, but maintenance and operational considerations would still apply. I'd be surprised if Alton generated so little traffic that NR/SWR want rid of the line, but Bentley was generally pretty quiet...

Again, Bentley is like Boxhill. May as well be kept open as it's on an existing line.

 

[zwk500]

But given trains go to Dorking anyway, it costs very little keeping it open. I thought we were supposed to be advocating green transport?

Beaulieu Road is rather similar in many ways to Boxhill, doubtless that would be counted as a candidate for closure by some. That's local to me, if anyone tried that on believe you me I would take an active part in protests.

Please let's not go down the route of such dangerously hardline economic conservatism which could produce lasting damage. There's got to be something better than permanent closure. Temporary cuts during economic hard times is one thing (and much more acceptable); once you close a line and lift the track, it's then a difficult and expensive job to get it open again.

I would say that stations like these, i.e. little used intermediate stations on a route that will definitely be kept open, should only be considered for closure where doing so would give a substantive benefit to the service of 'major' station, e.g. Making the service regular clock-face, or increasing frequency, or saving a unit/driver out of the cycle. A couple of minutes journey time should be secondary to maintaining the permeability of the network.

In this area, closing some of the stations on the North Downs Line should be considered for closure if it would allow the fabled 3rd path to operation. However I think problems with getting platform capacity at Redhill are the bigger blocker there.

In my view the only closures worth doing right now are stations and services which are parliamentary and serve little useful purpose. Denton, Reddish, that sort of thing.

Agree, if it isn't worth a proper service it should be mothballed. Denton and Reddish may yet have their time, so I wouldn't demolish them and the route is heavily used by freight so it won't be ripped up.

 

[nw1]

I would say that stations like these, i.e. little used intermediate stations on a route that will definitely be kept open, should only be considered for closure where doing so would give a substantive benefit to the service of 'major' station, e.g. Making the service regular clock-face, or increasing frequency, or saving a unit/driver out of the cycle.

I'm not sure if these benefits (particularly the last one) would be enough to justify closure. I haven't checked the timetable but it is entirely possible that, in a future timetable, a Boxhill stop could lead to a 3-min turn around (below the minimum - AFAIK - of 5, thus needing an extra unit and a 33-min turnaround instead), and the removal of Boxhill could result in a 5-min turnaround with a saving of one unit. I'd hope that reason alone would not be enough to cut out a stop such as this.

In this area, closing some of the stations on the North Downs Line should be considered for closure if it would allow the fabled 3rd path to operation. However I think problems with getting platform capacity at Redhill are the bigger blocker there.

Again I'm not convinced of this. Is a third path necessary? What about lengthening the existing hourly Reading-Gatwick instead? Again I would argue that closure is too big a price to pay for the luxury of two fast trains an hour, when one has sufficed for many years.

 

[zwk500]

I'm not sure if these benefits (particularly the last one) would be enough to justify closure. I haven't checked the timetable but it is entirely possible that, in a future timetable, a Boxhill stop could lead to a 3-min turn around (below the minimum - AFAIK - of 5, thus needing an extra unit and a 33-min turnaround instead), and the removal of Boxhill could result in a 5-min turnaround with a saving of one unit. I'd hope that reason alone would not be enough to cut out a stop such as this.

Again I'm not convinced of this. Is a third path necessary? What about lengthening the existing hourly Reading-Gatwick instead? Again I would argue that closure is too big a price to pay for the luxury of two fast trains an hour, when one has sufficed for many years.

These would all have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis for each individual proposal.
For Boxhill I'd agree the savings aren't worth it. For the North Downs Line I'd say the through traffic to/from Gatwick was more important pre-covid, probably still is. However there's no point closing stations if the problems at Gatwick, Redhill and Guildford getting platforms would stop the service anyway.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm not sure if these benefits (particularly the last one) would be enough to justify closure. I haven't checked the timetable but it is entirely possible that, in a future timetable, a Boxhill stop could lead to a 3-min turn around (below the minimum - AFAIK - of 5, thus needing an extra unit and a 33-min turnaround instead), and the removal of Boxhill could result in a 5-min turnaround with a saving of one unit. I'd hope that reason alone would not be enough to cut out a stop such as this.

The better option re:Boxhill would be skip-stopping, on the assumption that there's another similar-usage station on the route which those services that call at Boxhill could omit. I'm not familiar with the line south/east of Guildford, so I don't know if there is such a candidate.

 

[yorksrob]

42 passengers could easily be moved by bus just as quickly for vastly less money. If the average loading was over a hundred I'd be slightly more impressed.

Be prepared that the post-Covid reality of work-from-home, public spending cuts and people struggling to afford any form of transport is going to force not only station closures but also complete Beeching-style line closures. I would be most surprised if the Barnstaple branch survives long-term. It's not on the tourism map to anything like the extent of Penzance, St Ives or Newquay, and the local economy just isn't sufficient to support it. Right now it and Okehampton are propping each other up, and OKE has access to northern Dartmoor going for it, but once the honeymoon period novelty has worn off, I'd be astounded if it didn't see services reduced - as mentioned, the station is very inconveniently located for most local residents and this combined with the slowness of the service means nobody who has a choice of modes is opting for the train as their first resort. Both trackbeds would likely end up carrying more people as cycle paths than they ever will as working railways, sad to say.

As for the campaigns to reopen the Ilfracombe and Bude lines... fanciful barely begins to describe how profoundly unviable these non-starters are. Completely and utterly impossible. The nascent Torrington heritage railway is a waste of time and money too, it will never get anywhere.

The L&B appears largely moribund these days too, for all the grand plans they've published they're no closer to Parracombe now than they were a decade ago...

Obviously the rise of work from home has little to do with a regional railway such as Barnstaple, but it's also obvious that covid will be used as a handy excuse for those with a Becoming style agenda.

The same unconvincing arguments have been floating around for decades, but they have undoubtedly been rejuvenated.

 

[Route115?]

Should we be talking about closure or making it a request stop? I would imagine that the cost of keeping an unmanned station is fairly low particularly if the footbridge is required for pedestrian flows anyway. Obviously closing stations will reduce journey times - its a trade off.

Closing lightly used branch lines will save money but is not politically popular (indeed there is a fund to reopen closed lines, although its funds aren't going to go very far).

 

[Xavi]

I’ve read this thread having travelled to Okehampton today and also witnessed trains to Barnstaple. The Okehampton line is thriving, revitalising the town and wider community. What stood out at Okehampton was the number of passengers with luggage taking taxis or lifts to the station.

Barnstaple trains certainly need the 3-car 158s and when Okehampton Parkway is funded and built, I doubt very much 2-car 150s will suffice on many services.

I have no doubt that Ilfracombe and Bideford would benefit in a similar way. However, that’s unlikely to happen unless the wider benefits of rail and total cost of motoring are considered in future investment appraisals.

As for these routes requiring subsidies I’m not aware of the data being available to justify that statement. From my experience this year, carriages on services in London and SE are typically emptier than those in Devon. As for commuting, office occupancy figures for my company across the UK indicate that WFH is more popular in London and SE than elsewhere, and rail usage would appear to reflect this.

The pictures are Okehampton at 1515 today and some of the passengers waiting to board the 1619 Barnstaple at Exeter St Davids.

My conclusion is @21C195 Brentor and some other contributors underestimate the popularity of rail travel in Devon and Cornwall.

 

[Bertie the bus]

The pictures are Okehampton at 1515 today and some of the passengers waiting to board the 1619 Barnstaple at Exeter St Davids.

My conclusion is @21C195 Brentor and some other contributors underestimate the popularity of rail travel in Devon and Cornwall.

Those photos show about 15 people at Okehampton and maybe 30 at Exeter. They don't back up the rest of your post. 30 passengers don't require a 3 car 158.

 

[Neptune]

I’ve read this thread having travelled to Okehampton today and also witnessed trains to Barnstaple. The Okehampton line is thriving, revitalising the town and wider community. What stood out at Okehampton was the number of passengers with luggage taking taxis or lifts to the station.

Barnstaple trains certainly need the 3-car 158s and when Okehampton Parkway is funded and built, I doubt very much 2-car 150s will suffice on many services.

I have no doubt that Ilfracombe and Bideford would benefit in a similar way. However, that’s unlikely to happen unless the wider benefits of rail and total cost of motoring are considered in future investment appraisals.

As for these routes requiring subsidies I’m not aware of the data being available to justify that statement. From my experience this year, carriages on services in London and SE are typically emptier than those in Devon. As for commuting, office occupancy figures for my company across the UK indicate that WFH is more popular in London and SE than elsewhere, and rail usage would appear to reflect this.

The pictures are Okehampton at 1515 today and some of the passengers waiting to board the 1619 Barnstaple at Exeter St Davids.

My conclusion is @21C195 Brentor and some other contributors underestimate the popularity of rail travel in Devon and Cornwall.

This is all very well but it is a peak season weekend in August. What are loads like in the middle of January or February I wonder.

I have travelled on the Devon local network on holiday many times in the past both in and out of peak season and it is noticeably busy in August and not so in June when previously a 143 would cope on many trains.

 

[Xavi]

Those photos show about 15 people at Okehampton and maybe 30 at Exeter. They don't back up the rest of your post. 30 passengers don't require a 3 car 158.

Ha ha ha! Says @Bertie the bus from the sofa. At Okehampton you can see people are walking out of the station having just left the incoming train. Many more were still leaving the train, and in the 10 minutes before the 1525 departure another 50+ passengers arrived at the station.

At Exeter the picture was 15 minutes before departure, many more arrived on the platform and others arrived on the delayed Paddington arrival (well done GWR for holding the connection). Also, most passengers travelling from Exeter were on the service on arrival having boarded at Exeter Central.

I’ve never taken or posted any pictures like this before but having read the nonsense written by those who believe ‘rural’ trains cart air around, I decided the reality should be demonstrated. Next time I’ll ask them to line up for a group photo!!

 

[geoffk]

The 42 passengers was an average.... the 0732 from Barnstaple usually carries just over 200 from Barnstaple (based on a 3 car 158 being full leaving) and the last train probably carries no one back, thats how averages work.

The work for home theory doesn't really work down here, most of the commuters in the Devon area are employed in retail/hospitality which is why commuter traffic has returned to normal here.

Again, from your ramblings you're unable to provide any sources for your uninformed speculation, I honestly would invite you to at least go and travel on these lines before making such statements, the thought that the Barnstaple line is some lightly used rural line is utter tosh!

Many of the 200 from Barnstaple will be Exeter College students, who travel in daily from all over Devon.

 

[Xavi]

This is all very well but it is a peak season weekend in August. What are loads like in the middle of January or February I wonder.

I have travelled on the Devon local network on holiday many times in the past both in and out of peak season and it is noticeably busy in August and not so in June when previously a 143 would cope on many trains.

Busy throughout the year. The holiday season is much longer nowadays with people taking several shorter breaks rather than one a year with holiday parks opening from February to October half-term. Whilst there is higher visitor usage from May to September, this is counterbalanced by very high student traffic on the local network during the academic year. Many students attend higher education at Exeter College from a wide geographical area, and since the timetable varies for each student (not 8.45 - 3.15 for all students) the traffic is spread through the day.

 

[RobShipway]

I’ve read this thread having travelled to Okehampton today and also witnessed trains to Barnstaple. The Okehampton line is thriving, revitalising the town and wider community. What stood out at Okehampton was the number of passengers with luggage taking taxis or lifts to the station.

Barnstaple trains certainly need the 3-car 158s and when Okehampton Parkway is funded and built, I doubt very much 2-car 150s will suffice on many services.

I have no doubt that Ilfracombe and Bideford would benefit in a similar way. However, that’s unlikely to happen unless the wider benefits of rail and total cost of motoring are considered in future investment appraisals.

As for these routes requiring subsidies I’m not aware of the data being available to justify that statement. From my experience this year, carriages on services in London and SE are typically emptier than those in Devon. As for commuting, office occupancy figures for my company across the UK indicate that WFH is more popular in London and SE than elsewhere, and rail usage would appear to reflect this.

The pictures are Okehampton at 1515 today and some of the passengers waiting to board the 1619 Barnstaple at Exeter St Davids.

My conclusion is @21C195 Brentor and some other contributors underestimate the popularity of rail travel in Devon and Cornwall.

Those photos show about 15 people at Okehampton and maybe 30 at Exeter. They don't back up the rest of your post. 30 passengers don't require a 3 car 158.

I think that a two car class 165 or three car 165/1 unit would be more appropriate than a 3 car 158 to be honest from the photos provided.

But I have to agree that many in these forums do underestimate the popularity of rail travel, not just in Devon & Cornwall but around the country. I think that you also need to see the amount of passengers in rush hour periods such as 6am - 10am and 3pm - 7pm on Monday to Friday, but also look at these period on Saturdays & Sundays as to how many passengers use the train services provided.

For example, local to me has been Eastbourne Airshow and many people have taken to using the bus due to the train strikes to get into Eastbourne whether it is from Brighton or Hastings direction. Now normally even during August, the Coaster Double deck buses into Eastbourne can be half empty, rather than completely full as they where yesterday. Now the Brighton & Hove Coaster buses are Wright Streetdeck buses that hold between 70 to 100 people on them. Now, you say that possibly half of those if there had been a train service running would have taken a train and working on the basis that say Between Brighton and Eastbourne there was at least 6 buses an hour on doing either 12, 12a, 12x or 13x services that is potentially 600 people being moved by bus in an hour.

Now, when it comes to reopening old lines, I would be looking at the fact is the local bus services full to capacity, maybe at the times that I have mentioned above as to how many passengers are travelling and perhaps also find out where are they travelling too?